Life span of negative projected as slide

Discussion in '35mm Cameras' started by Paul Rubin, Jan 9, 2004.

  1. Paul Rubin

    Paul Rubin Guest

    Umm, why on earth would you want to project a negative?
     
    Paul Rubin, Jan 9, 2004
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. Paul Rubin

    Nick Zentena Guest


    Did the lab try and fix it and couldn't?

    Nick
     
    Nick Zentena, Jan 9, 2004
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. Paul Rubin

    Matt Clara Guest

    But as a negative, the shadows and highlights will be inverted, making body
    shapes alien and at least a little unrecognizable.

    I'd scan the negatives, and either try to correct for the color in Photoshop
    or convert to grey scale. And then print, or whatever.
     
    Matt Clara, Jan 9, 2004
    #3
  4. Paul Rubin

    Mark M Guest

    OK let me get this straight...
    You don't want to print them because the color is SOOO BAAAAD...
    ....BUT...you are simultaneously so supposedly UN-interested in color in the
    first place, that you actually enjoy looking at negatives of your
    naked...um...wife??? So if you can appreciate them even in negative form,
    we are supposed to believe that you won't print them simply because the
    ***color is bad???***

    ***All right... I'm gonna go out on a limb here and call your bluff:

    You are a sick little fella...who has either taken, or come accross some
    sexy images of ...somebody...like NOT your wife...and you know the labs will
    not print them for you since they are nudie shots...and yet...you get some
    sort of masterbatory thrill out of viewing even negative images of this
    female...even if it's alien-like and strange, since you know...in your
    head...that these are nudie pics of...somebody...you find sexy.
    So...you'd like to do two things:

    1) Avoid trouble for posessing pics you (perhaps) aren't supposed to have
    2) Have a bigger "venue" (screen) from which to get your jollies.

    Now... Do I paint a grim picture...or do I exhaggerate?????
     
    Mark M, Jan 9, 2004
    #4
  5. Paul Rubin

    Adam Barker Guest

    How long can I expect a color negative (cheap Fuji) to last in a slide
    projector? Say viewing for 5-8 seconds at a time. Most of these pictures
    are not worth printing, but I might want to make a print from a couple of
    these at some point, and don't want to ruin them.

    Thanks,
    Adam
     
    Adam Barker, Jan 9, 2004
    #5
  6. Paul Rubin

    Adam Barker Guest

    These are pictures of my wife, mostly body shots, where the skin tone didn't
    come out right and weren't worth making prints from. Think of it along the
    same lines as "why on earth would you want to look at the colors in an
    infrared photo?" Sure, the colors aren't "normal", but all the shapes,
    colors, and contrast are there to give a very viewable picture, and you
    can't tell that the skin tone came out looking flushed.

    Adam
     
    Adam Barker, Jan 9, 2004
    #6
  7. Paul Rubin

    Adam Barker Guest

    Maybe I should clarify I little. I am definitely suffering from
    poor-college-student-syndrome and don't have the money for a film scanner or
    pro-lab right now. I am also in the very beginning stages of learning how
    to use a camera on my first SLR. Most of these pictures would hardly be
    worth printing even if the color was right. I realize any lab could scan
    these negatives in, then I could manipulate them digitally, but I would just
    as soon burn more film until I get it right and figure out what I am doing.

    I do appreciate the suggestions of how to save the pictures, view them more
    effectively, etc. However I am just viewing these for nothing more than the
    sake of admiring my wife and was wondering how long I could project a
    negative before seriously degrading it.
     
    Adam Barker, Jan 9, 2004
    #7
  8. Color negatives are basically black and white negatives. The color
    components will be quickly lost, especially under light. They were never
    intended for much exposure to light. Different brands will react
    differently.

    The density will last longer and its like will be determined to a great
    extent to how well they were processed.
     
    Joseph Meehan, Jan 9, 2004
    #8
  9. Paul Rubin

    BG250 Guest

    Do you have a friend with a scanner? I'll scan negs for friends and
    coworkers for free every now and then and perhaps even print one out for
    them on photo paper. If you get a few images tweaked and then printed at a
    photofinisher, it shouldn't cost much. In low quantity, you should be able
    to get prints for under 40c each. It beats looking at projected negs that I
    can image look pretty bizarre. Color negative film is not made for
    projection so I would imagine that they would be damaged rather rapidly from
    the strong light and heat.
    bg
     
    BG250, Jan 9, 2004
    #9
  10. Joe, I am surprised at you - I'm sure you know that colour negatives are
    nothing like B&W negatives. CN film does start out with a silver halide
    component in each layer, but this is totally removed during processing
    in the bleach-fix stage.

    B&W negatives contain metallic silver grains suspended in a matrix of
    gelatine. They are susceptible to various kinds of chemical decay
    (either from processing material not completely removed, or from
    air-borne or contact contamination) but are not especially susceptible
    to light-induced decay. The silver is virtually immune to photochemical
    attack but the gelatine or film base may suffer very slow deterioration.

    Colour negatives, having had *all* the silver and silver halide removed
    in processing, consists of organic dyes in a similar (but more complex,
    multi-layered) matrix. These, like all colour dyes, are susceptible to
    photochemical oxidation - that is, they will fade in light.

    The extent to which they do this varies - see my other reply.
     
    David Littlewood, Jan 9, 2004
    #10
  11. Adam,

    Colour negatives are constructed of organic dye molecules suspended in
    gelatine. All organic dyes suffer from photochemical oxidation - fading
    under the action of light - and because of the way the dyes are "made"
    by bringing two part-molecules together in the processing stage they are
    almost always a long way from being the most stable organic dyes you can
    get.

    The light stability of negatives has not been well reported, probably
    because they are usually only subject to light for short periods. Much
    more is published on the light stability of slides and prints, since of
    course these are intended for display. With slides, the nearest
    equivalent, 2-4 hours is generally the time taken for a projector to
    cause noticeable fading (which usually appears as a colour cast, since
    one dye colour almost always fades faster than the others). However,
    Kodachrome - the most stable of all in the dark - fades noticeably after
    1 hour.

    These figures are taken from Henry Wilhelm's book "The Permanence and
    Care of Colour Photographs"; this is now unfortunately a bit long in the
    tooth (over 10 years), and newer films tend to be a little better (but
    probably not by much).

    I would assume - tentatively - that colour negatives will be no better
    than this - they are after all not designed for this purpose.

    One final factor is the type of bulb in your enlarger; if it is a quartz
    halogen bulb, ensure there is a glass filter between the bulb and the
    film. The reason for this is that quartz is fairly transparent to UV
    light (which is the kind of light which causes the worst damage) whereas
    glass is much more opaque to UV.

    I have tried to answer the question you asked as it may be of more
    general interest (especially to anyone using cross-processed film).
    However, personally, I would not waste time trying to look at negatives
    in this way. I would go along with the suggestions others have made, to
    have the negs scanned and colour-adjusted in Photoshop (or whatever).
     
    David Littlewood, Jan 9, 2004
    #11
  12. Paul Rubin

    David Guest

    "Snip
    Wrong question guys!!!

    Adam, why was the skin tone flushed?

    Is probably what he wants us to ask

    ;-|
     
    David, Jan 9, 2004
    #12
  13. Paul Rubin

    David Guest

    Not going to snip so don't be lazy - go to the bottom.

    Leav'm alone ya bully!!!!

    David
     
    David, Jan 9, 2004
    #13
  14. Paul Rubin

    David Guest

    Snip

    Aye Adam

    If your worried about loosing them. Set up you camera with 35mm SLIDE file
    (Tungsten if you want reasonable accuracy. daylight if you dont) and take
    some pics of the screen with your neg projected (or borrow a slide coppier)
    then you can put the neg away and view the slide of the neg. (if you can
    follow that lot your doing well......)

    ATB


    DAvid
     
    David, Jan 9, 2004
    #14
  15. Paul Rubin

    Bandicoot Guest

    Don't know the answer to your question- sorry - but just wanted to say I
    find your idea perfectly reasonable. Shapes are interesting in themselves,
    and a lot of good nude or 'figure' work is much more about shape and line
    than about being a recognisable piece of a body.



    Peter
     
    Bandicoot, Jan 9, 2004
    #15
  16. Paul Rubin

    Adam Barker Guest

    Lay off jerk. June 1st of this year will make 2 years we will have been
    married. One question for you: Have you ever loved somebody enough that
    you admire pictures of them whether or not the pictures are good ones????
    And as far as the color thing, think of black and white. It can be more
    forgiving on skin tone than color--same way with negatives. So either be
    nice enough to answer the simple question I asked, or just don't reply at
    all please. I realize there are a lot of perverse folks out there, but I
    sure don't consider myself one. And for your information there is very
    little nudity in any of these pictures, walmart would developed most of
    them.
     
    Adam Barker, Jan 9, 2004
    #16
  17. Paul Rubin

    Adam Barker Guest

    Thanks for the first actual answer I got. I suppose my best bet may be to
    take two identical shots on the next roll of film I take and expose one of
    them for various times and keep comparing them. I just wondered if anybody
    else had been silly enough to try something like this and knew how long they
    would stand up.

    Have a good one,
    Adam
     
    Adam Barker, Jan 9, 2004
    #17
  18. Being a poor college student is an honorable situation. It is, however,
    traditional that those who find themselves in that condition also find they
    have the resources for ingenuity. Part of the experience is discovering
    that there is much that money cannot buy, one of which is likely to be a
    friend of a friend of a friend who does have the equipment, and who is
    likely inadverse to a visit from someone to whom he/she can show off their
    gear. Scanners and printers are now cheap enough so that one can purchase
    both of decent quality for less than $500, well within the budget of said
    f(f(f))). That way, this new acquaintance gets to brag on his/her kit, and
    you get to have your wife appreciated by an independent (unbiased) viewer.

    As to the photography: Presumably you used daylight negative film indoors
    under tungsten light? Not a problem for a newish digital darkroom, and you
    get to learn some things about photography that you are unlikely to
    discover otherwise. Winners all around!

    Further: Burning film until you get it right without some serious review of
    what you have already done isn't that productive. You have no idea (at
    this point, at least) just how many ways there are to screw up your shots.
    The more you shoot, the more ways you will discover, as your tastes and
    standards will rise as you learn. And the only way you can even stay
    inside the curve, much less ahead of same, is to do due diligence with what
    you get. Study and learn... I mean, isn't that what you're already
    Not long at all. Certainly not long enough to satisfy your objective, I
    would think. Better to turn this into unforeseen opportunity, of the sort
    I described.

    Finally, the question you ask may not always get the answer you need, as you
    may have observed from this thread.

    Bill Tallman
     
    William D. Tallman, Jan 9, 2004
    #18
  19. Paul Rubin

    David Guest

    "Adam Barker" wrote
    Lucky boy.

    BTW - where'd you get the cheap fuji?

    David
     
    David, Jan 9, 2004
    #19
  20. Paul Rubin

    Adam Barker Guest

    Glad someone else appreciates the same. I was beginning to think people
    could appreciate some work where the color is off, like infrared, but not
    negatives.

    Adam
     
    Adam Barker, Jan 9, 2004
    #20
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.